Wrist-Worn Impairment Detection and Methods for Using Such

ABSTRACT

Various embodiments provide systems and methods for identifying impairment using measurement devices.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/820,942 entitled “Systems and Methods for Impairment Testing in a Monitoring System”, and filed Mar. 17, 2020 by Hanson et al.; which in turn claims priority to U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 62/851,127 entitled “Systems and Methods for Impairment Detection in a Monitoring System”, and filed May 22, 2019 by Hanson et al., U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 62/936,024 entitled “Systems and Methods for Impairment Detection in a Monitoring System”, and filed Nov. 15, 2019 by Hanson et al., U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 62/939,588 entitled “Systems and Methods for Impairment Detection in a Monitoring System”, and filed Nov. 23, 2019 by Hanson et al., and U.S. Provisional Pat. App. No. 62/966,709 entitled “Systems and Methods for Impairment Detection in a Monitoring System”, and filed Jan. 28, 2020 by Hanson et al. The entirety of each of the aforementioned references are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Various embodiments provide systems and methods for identifying impairment using an individual monitoring system.

A number of different substances impair an individual's ability to safely operate an automobile or other machinery. Field detection of impairment due to alcohol usage has been done using field sobriety testing where, for example, a police officer personally administers one or more tests and based upon the officer's perception a determination of impairment is made. However, waiting for an intervention to detect impairment is problematic.

Thus, for at least the aforementioned reasons, there exists a need in the art for more advanced approaches, devices and systems for detecting individual impairment.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Various embodiments provide systems and methods for detecting impairment using measurement devices.

This summary provides only a general outline of some embodiments. Many other objects, features, advantages and other embodiments will become more fully apparent from the following detailed description, the appended claims and the accompanying drawings and figures.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

A further understanding of the various embodiments may be realized by reference to the figures which are described in remaining portions of the specification. In the figures, similar reference numerals are used throughout several drawings to refer to similar components. In some instances, a sub-label consisting of a lower-case letter is associated with a reference numeral to denote one of multiple similar components. When reference is made to a reference numeral without specification to an existing sub-label, it is intended to refer to all such multiple similar components.

FIG. 1a is a block diagram illustrating a hybrid monitoring system including a user attached monitor device in accordance with various embodiments;

FIG. 1b is a block diagram of a user attached monitor in accordance with some embodiments;

FIG. 1c shows a wrist-worn user attached monitor device with an attachment element for attaching the user attached monitor device to a wrist or other limb of an individual in accordance with some embodiments;

FIGS. 2a-2b are flow diagrams showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for using a user attached monitor device to detect impairment of a monitored individual;

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an eye movement baseline for a monitored individual using a user attached monitor device;

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a user impairment detection system operated without relying on a user attached monitor device in accordance with some embodiments;

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an eye movement baseline for a licensed individual at, for example, a location where a driver's license is being issued;

FIG. 6 is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for using a field user eye movement system for detecting user impairment that relies on a previously established individual eye movement baseline;

FIG. 7 is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for using a field monitored individual eye movement system for detecting monitored individual impairment without using a previously established individual eye movement baseline;

FIG. 8a is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing a monitored individual's reaction via a user attached monitor device;

FIG. 8b shows an example of a monitored individual holding a user attached monitor device while the reaction measurement of the method of FIG. 8a is performed;

FIGS. 8c-8d show different views of a reaction game displayed via the user attached monitor device of FIG. 8 b;

FIG. 9a shows another example of a monitored individual holding a user attached monitor device while the reaction measurement of the method of FIG. 8a is performed;

FIGS. 9b-9c show different views of another reaction game displayed via the user attached monitor device of FIG. 9 a;

FIG. 10a is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an ability of a monitored individual to balance via a user attached monitor device while the monitored individual is standing on one leg;

FIG. 10b shows an example of a monitored individual holding a user attached monitor device while balancing on one leg while the method of FIG. 10a is performed;

FIG. 11a is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an ability of a monitored individual to balance via a user attached monitor device while walking;

FIG. 11b shows an example of a monitored individual holding a user attached monitor device while walking during the method of FIG. 11a is performed;

FIG. 12 is a flow diagram showing a method for predicting impairment based at least in part on two or more impairment tests in accordance with some embodiments;

FIG. 13 is a flow diagram showing a method for predicting impairment based at least in part on historical data associated with a monitored individual in accordance with some embodiments;

FIG. 14 is a block diagram of a multi-tiered impairment detection system in accordance with various embodiments;

FIG. 15 is a flow diagram showing a method for passive impairment detection in accordance with various embodiments;

FIG. 16 is a flow diagram showing a method for learning an impairment threshold for passive impairment testing based upon feedback from the method of FIG. 15 in accordance with various embodiments;

FIG. 17 is a flow diagram showing a method for detecting impairment using a tiered series of passive impairment testing (i.e., the monitored individual is doing things in their normal course), active impairment testing (i.e., the monitored individual is doing things that they are requested to do), and/or monitoring officer intervention in accordance with some embodiments;

FIG. 18 is a flow diagram showing a method for learning an impairment threshold for active impairment testing based upon feedback from the method of FIG. 17 in accordance with various embodiments; and

FIG. 19 is a flow diagram showing a method in accordance with some embodiments for selectively triggering a testing process based upon one or more conditions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Various embodiments provide systems and methods for identifying impairment using an individual monitoring system.

Various embodiments provide a wrist-worn impairment detection monitor. In some cases, such a wrist-worn impairment detection monitor is capable of rendering a likelihood that a wearer of the wrist-worn impairment detection monitor is impaired. The wrist-worn impairment detection monitoring has a variety of input sensors that can be used in relation to impairment detection processing capabilities to determine an impairment status of an individual.

Some embodiments provide systems for determining a likelihood of impairment. The systems include a user attached monitor device. The user attached monitor device includes: a strap operable to secure the user attached monitor device to a wrist of a monitored individual, a sensor, a display, a processor, and a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium includes non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: generate a characteristic of the monitored individual based at least in part on data received from the sensor; and generate an impairment value based at least in part on the characteristic of the monitored individual. In some cases, the system further includes a central monitoring station communicably coupled to the user attached monitor device via a wireless network. In some instances, the impairment value indicates a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired.

In various instances of the aforementioned embodiments, the computer readable medium further includes non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: receive a test setup request via wireless communication network where the test setup request indicates a particular impairment test; and start the particular impairment test by enabling the sensor and requesting that the monitored individual perform a particular activity. In some instances of the aforementioned embodiments, the characteristic of the monitored individual is an eye movement characteristic and the sensor is an image sensor. In some such embodiments, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: display a video on a display of the user attached monitor device; receive images of eyes of the monitored individual captured by the image sensor while the monitored individual watches the video; and use the received images to calculate the eye movement characteristic. In some cases, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the eye movement characteristic to a baseline eye movement threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the eye movement characteristic and the baseline eye movement threshold.

In some instances of the aforementioned embodiments where the characteristic of the monitored individual is a balance characteristic, and the sensor is an accelerometer, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: receive acceleration data from the accelerometer; and calculate the balance characteristic based upon the acceleration data. In some cases, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the balance characteristic to a baseline balance threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the balance characteristic and the baseline balance threshold.

In some instances of the aforementioned embodiments where the characteristic of the monitored individual is a duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: display a game via a display on the user attached monitor device; and receive timer data from the timer, where the timer data indicates the duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual while playing the game. In some cases, the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual to a baseline reaction threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual and the baseline reaction threshold.

Turning to FIG. 1a , a block diagram illustrates a monitoring system 100 including a user attached monitor device 110 and a central monitoring station 160. Central monitoring station 160 is wirelessly coupled to user attached monitor device 110 via one or more wide area wireless (e.g., cellular telephone network, Internet via a Wi-Fi access point, or the like) communication networks 150.

Central monitoring station 160 may be any location, device or system where location data and/or other types of data are received, including by way of non-limiting example: a cellular/smart phone, an email account, a website, a network database, and a memory device. The location data and/or other types of data are stored by central monitoring station 160 and is retrievable by a monitor, such as a parent, guardian, parole officer, court liaison, spouse, friend, or other authorized group or individual. In this manner, the monitor is able to respond appropriately to detected activity of a monitored individual. In some cases, the monitor is able to retrieve the location data and/or other data types via a user interaction system 185 which may be, but is not limited to, a network connected user interface device communicatively coupled via a network to central monitoring station 160 and/or directly to user attached monitor device 110 via wide area wireless network 150.

Central monitoring station 160 may include a server supported website, which may be supported by a server system comprising one or more physical servers, each having a processor, a memory, an operating system, input/output interfaces, and network interfaces, all known in the art, coupled to the network. The server supported website comprises one or more interactive web portals through which the monitor may monitor the location of the monitored individual in accordance with the described embodiments. In particular, the interactive web portals may enable the monitor to retrieve the location and user identification data of one or more monitored individuals, set or modify ‘check-in’ schedules, and/or set or modify preferences. The interactive web portals are accessible via a personal computing device, such as for example, a home computer, laptop, tablet, and/or smart phone.

In some embodiments, the server supported website comprises a mobile website or mobile application accessible via a software application on a mobile device (e.g. smart phone). The mobile website may be a modified version of the server supported website with limited or additional capabilities suited for mobile location monitoring.

Central monitoring station 160 is communicably coupled to an impairment detection and historical database 1020. Impairment detection and historical database 1020 includes a variety of data corresponding to a monitored individual including, but not limited to, types of addictions and problems that the monitored individual has had in the past, last incident of substance abuse and the type of substance used, physical locations visited by the monitored individual during a previous time period, physical characteristics of the monitored individual (e.g., normal blood pressure, normal respiration rate, resting pulse rate, measurements related to gait, and the like), other monitored individuals that the monitored individual has been in proximity to and the types of addictions and problems that the other monitored individuals have had in the past, triggering events that have preceded prior addiction relapses of the monitored individual, and/or recent scenarios that are similar to prior triggering events. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other historical data related to a monitored individual that may be maintained in historical database in accordance with various embodiments. In addition, impairment detection and historical database 1020 may include instructions executable by central monitoring station to effectuate various monitoring and/or recording processes that may be executed on central monitoring station 160 and/or downloaded to user attached monitor device 110 for execution local user attached monitor device 110.

User attached monitor device 110 includes a location sensor that senses the location of the device and generates a location data. For example, when user attached monitor device 110 is capable of receiving wireless global navigation satellite system (hereinafter “GNSS”) location information 136, 138, 139 from a sufficient number of GPS or GNSS satellites 145 respectively, user attached monitor device 110 may use the received wireless GNSS location information to calculate or otherwise determine the location of human subject 110. Global positioning system (hereinafter “GPS) is one example of a GNSS location system. While GPS is used in the specific embodiments discussed herein, it is recognized that GPS may be replaced by any type of GNSS system. In some instances, this location includes latitude, longitude, and elevation. It should be noted that other types of earth-based triangulation may be used in accordance with different embodiments of the present invention. For example, other cell phone-based triangulation, UHF band triangulation such as, for example, long range (hereinafter “LoRa”) triangulation signals. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other types of earth-based triangulation that may be used. The location data may comprise one or more of, but is not limited to: global positioning system (“GPS”) data, Assisted GPS (“A-GPS”) data, Advanced Forward Link Trilateration (“AFLT”) data, and/or cell tower triangulation data. Where GPS is used, user attached monitor device 110 receives location information from three or more GPS or GNSS satellites 145 via respective communication links 136, 138, 139. The location data and/or other data gathered by user attached monitor device 110 is wirelessly transmitted to central monitoring station 160 via wide area wireless network 150 accessed via a wireless link 135.

In some embodiments, user attached monitor device 110 may further include a biometric detection module 1009 that can, among other things, operate as part of an overall identification sensor generating user identification data for identifying the monitored individual in association with the generation of the location data. The user identification data may comprise one or more of: image data, video data, biometric data (e.g. fingerprint, DNA, retinal scan, facial recognition, electrocardiogram (ECG), or the like), or any other type of data that may be used to verify the identity of the monitored individual at or near the time the location data is generated. The user identification sensor may comprise one or more of: a camera, microphone, heat sensor, biometric data sensor, or any other type of device capable of sensing/generating the aforementioned types of user identification data. Biometric detection module 1009 assembles one or more elements of data gathered by motion detector 152, microphone 1002, image sensor 1003, pulse/ECG sensor 1001, and/or finger print sensor 1004 into a user identification package which is forwarded to central monitoring station 160 via wireless transceiver circuitry 168. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize various circuits and/or sensors capable of indicating that user attached monitor device is moving that may be used in relation to different embodiments.

User attached monitor device 110 further includes a memory communicatively coupled to a control unit—which is also communicatively coupled to the location sensor, the identification sensor and the wireless transceiver—for controlling the operations thereof in accordance with the functionalities described herein. The memory may include non-transient instructions (e.g., software-based or firmware-based instructions) executable by the control unit to perform and/or enable various functions associated with user attached monitor device 110. User attached monitor device 110 may include a strap (not shown) which can be wrapped around a limb or torso of the monitored individual to secure user attached monitor device 110 to the monitored individual. The strap and/or other parts of user attached monitor device 110 includes one or more tamper circuits and/or sensors that allow for a determination as to whether the device has been removed or otherwise tampered. Examples of a strap and tamper detection circuitry that may be used in relation to various embodiments discussed herein are described in U.S. Pat. No. 9,355,579 entitled “Methods for Image Based Tamper Detection”, and filed by Buck et al. on Sep. 15, 2014; and US Pat. Pub. No. US 2017-0270778 A1 entitled “Systems and Methods for Improved Monitor Attachment”, and filed by Melton et al. on Mar. 21, 2016. Both of the aforementioned references are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of straps, tamper circuits, tamper devices, and/or attachment and tamper detection approaches that may be used in relation to various embodiments. User attached monitor device 110 may include a Wi-Fi transceiver capable of receiving information from one or more Wi-Fi access points 187 that may be used to identify location via a Wi-Fi communication link 113.

Turning to FIG. 1b , a block diagram 194 of user attached monitor device 110 is shown in accordance with some embodiments. As shown, user attached monitor device 110 includes a device ID 161 that may be maintained in a memory 165, and is thus accessible by a controller circuit 167. Controller circuit 167 is able to interact with a GPS receiver 162 and memory 165 at times for storing and generating records of successively determined GPS locations. Similarly, controller circuit 167 is able to interact with a Wi-Fi receiver 188 and memory 165 at times for storing and generating records of successively determined Wi-Fi access point identifications and signal strength. In some cases, memory 165 may include non-transient instructions (e.g., software-based or firmware-based instructions) executable by controller circuit 167 to perform and/or enable various functions associated with user attached monitor device 110. As user attached monitor device 110 comes within range of one or more Wi-Fi access points (e.g., Wi-Fi access points 187), Wi-Fi receiver 188 senses the signal provided by the respective Wi-Fi access points, and provides an identification of the respective Wi-Fi access point and a signal strength of the signal received from the Wi-Fi access point to Wi-Fi receiver 188. This information is provided to controller circuit 167 which stores the information to memory 165.

Where user attached monitor device 110 is operating in a standard mode, controller circuit 167 causes an update and reporting of the location of user attached monitor device 110 via a wide area transceiver 168 and wide area communication network 150. In some embodiments, wide area transceiver 168 is a cellular telephone transceiver. In some cases, the location data is time stamped. In contrast, where user attached monitor device 110 is within range of a public Wi-Fi access point, reporting the location of user attached monitor device 110 may be done via the public Wi-Fi access point in place of the cellular communication link.

Which technologies are used to update the location of user attached monitor device 110 may be selected either by default, by programming from central monitor station 160, or based upon sensed scenarios with corresponding pre-determined selections. For example, it may be determined whether sufficient battery power as reported by power status 196 remains in user attached monitor device 110 to support a particular position determination technology. Where insufficient power remains, the particular technology is disabled. In some cases, a maximum cost of resolving location may be set for user attached monitor device 110. For example, resolving Wi-Fi location data may incur a per transaction cost to have a third-party service provider resolve the location information. When a maximum number of resolution requests have been issued, the Wi-Fi position determination technology may be disabled. Further, it may be determined whether the likelihood that a particular position determination technology will be capable of providing meaningful location information. For example, where user attached monitor device 110 is moved indoors, GPS receiver 162 may be disabled to save power. Alternatively, where the tracking device is traveling at relatively high speeds, the Wi-Fi receiver 188 may be disabled. As yet another example, where cellular phone jamming is occurring, support for cell tower triangulation position determination may be disabled. As yet another example, where GPS jamming is occurring, GPS receiver 162 may be disabled. As yet another example, where user attached monitor device 110 is stationary, the lowest cost (from both a monetary and power standpoint) tracking may be enabled while all other technologies are disabled. Which position determination technologies are used may be based upon a zone in which a tracking device is located. Some zones may be rich in Wi-Fi access points and in such zones Wi-Fi technology may be used. Otherwise, another technology such as cell tower triangulation or GPS may be used. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other scenarios and corresponding combinations of technologies may be best.

Controller circuit 167 of user attached monitor device 110 at times functions in conjunction with wide area transceiver 168 to send and receive data and signals through wide area communication network 150. This link at times is useful for passing information and/or control signals between a central monitoring system (not shown) and user attached monitor device 110. The information transmitted may include, but is not limited to, location information, measured alcohol information, one or more passive or active impairment tests applied to the monitored individual, and information about the status of user attached monitor device 110. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of information that may be transferred via wide area communication network 150.

Various embodiments of user attached monitor device 110 include a variety of sensors capable of determining the status of user attached monitor device 110, and of the individual associated therewith. For example, a status monitor 166 may include one or more of the following subcomponents: power status sensor 196 capable of indicating a power status of user attached monitor device 110, a pulse/ECG sensor 1001 operable to sense pulse rate of the monitored individual and an electrocardiogram unique to the monitored individual based upon electrodes (not shown) in contact with the skin of the monitored individual, an image sensor 1003 (e.g., camera) operable to capture an image of the monitored individual when user attached monitor device 110 is properly positioned, and a finger print sensor 1004 operable to sense the print of a finger placed on a display 159 of user attached monitor device 110. The power status may be expressed, for example as a percentage of battery life remaining. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of forms in which power status may be expressed. The pulse rate may be expressed in beats per minute and the ECG may be shown visually via display 159. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of forms in which pulse rate and/or ECG rate may be expressed.

In addition, user attached monitor device 110 includes a set of shielding sensors 169 that are capable of determining whether user attached monitor device 110 is being shielded from receiving GPS signals and/or if GPS jamming is ongoing, a set of device health indicators 154, a tamper sensor 151 capable of determining whether unauthorized access to user attached monitor device 110 has occurred or whether user attached monitor device 110 has been removed from an associated individual being monitored, a motion/proximity sensor 152 capable of determining whether user attached monitor device 110 is moving and/or whether it is within proximity of an individual, and/or an alcohol sensor 153. Such an alcohol sensor may be any alcohol sensor capable of estimating an amount of alcohol in the individual being monitored. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of alcohol sensors and corresponding alcohol sensing circuitry that may be used in relation to different embodiments. In some cases, motion/proximity sensor 152 includes one or more accelerometer sensors and/or gyro sensors that are capable of accurately sensing motion of the monitored individual. In some cases, the detected motion information is used to quantify the gait of the monitored individual or balance of the monitored individual as they move or perform a particular task. In addition, motion/proximity sensor 152 includes sensors capable of determining a proximity of user attached monitor device 110 to a monitored individual to which the device is assigned. This information may be used to assure that the monitored individual is wearing user attached monitor device 110. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of shielding sensors, a variety of device health transducers and indicators, a variety of tamper sensors, various different types of motion sensors, different proximity to human sensors, and various human body physical measurement sensors or transducers that may be incorporated into user attached monitor device 110 according to various different instances and/or embodiments.

A user input 1005 allows for a user of user attached monitor device 110 to provide information to user attached monitor device 110. User input 1005 may include a push button, a turning knob, and/or a touchscreen display (integrated as part of display 159) depending upon the particular implementation. A speaker and microphone 1002 is included that is capable of providing an audio sound audible to a user of user attached monitor device 110 and of accepting audio. A vibrator 1006 is included that is capable of making user attached monitor device 110 vibrate to alert a user of user attached monitor device. Each of vibrator 1006, speaker 1002, user input 1005, and display 159 is communicatively coupled to memory 165 and/or a controller circuit 167 for controlling the operations thereof.

A schedule of check-in times (either periodic or random) may be downloaded to memory 165 by central monitoring station 160 via wireless link 135. A monitored individual wearing user attached monitor device 110 may be alerted by one or more of: a visual prompt via display 159, an audio prompt via speaker 1002, and a tactile prompt via vibrator 1006. In various cases, controller circuit 167 is part of an integrated circuit. In one or more cases, memory 165 is included in an integrated circuit with controller circuit 167. In various cases, memory 165 may include non-transient instructions (e.g., software or firmware-based based instructions) executable by controller circuit 167 to perform and/or enable various functions associated with user attached monitor device 110. Such non-transient instructions executable by controller circuit 167 may cause passive impairment monitoring of the monitored individual and/or active impairment monitoring of the monitored individual similar to that discussed below. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other processes that may be caused/controlled by non-transient instructions executing on controller circuit 167. A visual prompt may include, but is not limited to, text, images and/or a combination thereof, or a series of such visual prompts. An audio prompt may include, but is not limited to, one or more different audio prompts, or a series thereof. Each prompt may be stored in memory 165 and retrieved in accordance with the schedule that is also maintained in memory 165. In some embodiments, alerting the monitored individual involves a prompt that includes an e-mail or text message generated by central monitoring station 160 (e.g. the server supported website) and transmitted to the e-mail account or cellular phone number corresponding to user attached monitor device 110. In particular embodiments, such a prompt may include a ‘post’ on the user's ‘wall,’ ‘feed,’ or other social networking privilege. In some embodiments, the prompt may comprise an automated or live phone call to the monitored individual.

Additionally, user attached monitor device 110 includes a user response application 199 that controls operation of one or more user impairment detection tests administered using user attached monitor device 110. User response application 199 may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware-based, or some combination of the aforementioned. In some cases, user response application 199 provides control for user attached monitor device 110 of diagnostic processes described below in one or more of FIGS. 2-3, 5-7 and 8-18.

Turning to FIG. 1c , a sensing device 2065 is shown with an example attachment element 2090 connected at opposite ends of sensing device 2065 (i.e., a first end 2096 and a second end 2098). Attachment element 2090 has an outer surface 2092 and an inner surface 2091. Attachment element 2090 is operable to securely attach a user attached monitor device 2095 (i.e., a combination of sensing device 2065 and attachment element 2090) to a limb of an individual in accordance with some embodiments. One or more electrodes 2081, 2082 are formed into inner surface 2091 such that they are in close proximity to the skin of the monitored individual when user attached monitor device 2095 is attached to the monitored individual. In some cases, attachment element 2090 is tailored to attached to a wrist of a monitored individual. In various embodiments, attachment element 2090 includes electrically and/or optically conductive material used to make a conductive connection from first end 2096 to second end 2098 through attachment element 2090 and is used in relation to determining whether user attached monitor device 2095 remains attached and/or has been tampered with. While FIG. 1c shows a strap as an example attachment element, based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other types of attachment elements that may be used in relation to different embodiments. In other embodiments, attachment element 2090 is long enough to attach around the torso of the monitored individual and is sufficiently flexible to allow expansion and contraction of the chest of the monitored individual as they breath. Such expansion and contraction may be used to sense respiration rate of the monitored individual.

Sensing device 2065 includes a case 2089 in which various electronic components are maintained. In addition, sensing device 2065 includes a button 2083, a radial dial 2085, a display 2087 (which may be a touchscreen display), and a combination speaker, microphone, and image sensor 2079. Together, sensing device 2065 includes a button 2083, a radial dial 2085, a display 2085, a combination speaker, microphone, and image sensor 2079, electrodes 2081, 2082 provide the user interface for user attached monitor device 2065 and support the functionality of the various sensors discussed above in relation to FIG. 1b . Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of inputs and outputs that may be incorporated into user attached monitor device 2095 to provide the functionality discussed herein.

Turning to FIG. 2a , a flow diagram 200 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for using a combination of a user attached monitor device 110 to detect impairment of a monitored individual. Following flow diagram 200, a monitored individual response test is selected (block 205). The response test is designed to test a biometric or physiological response of an individual to stimuli provided via user attached monitor device 110 and/or provided by the monitored individual in response to a command received via user attached monitor device 110. In some embodiments, the response test determines eye movement response to visual imaging displayed via display 159 of user attached monitor device 110. Image sensor 2003 detects an image of the face of the monitored individual, and the image is reduced to eye movement metrics under the control of user response application 199. Eye movement may be discerned by sensing movement of the eye greater than a defined distance from a default eye location based upon the image data received from image sensor 2003, and calculating a rate at which the determined deviation is sensed. While the embodiments disclosed herein discuss the tested biometric as eye movement, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other biometrics that may be tested in relation to different embodiments. Such other biometric tests include, but are not limited to, requiring the user to touch certain parts of display 159 in response to changing conditions as discussed more fully below in relation to FIGS. 8-9 and/or requiring the user to hold user attached monitor device 110 away from their body while balancing on one foot or walking as discussed more fully below in relation to FIGS. 20-11.

The selected test setup is communicated to the user attached monitor device 110 (block 210). This may include, for example, transmitting a setup command for the selected user impairment test to user attached monitor device 110 where the commands are executable by controller circuit 167 to perform the selected test. The test setup may be communicated to user attached monitor device 110 by central monitoring station via 160 wide area network 150 over either WiFi, cellular, or other communication links.

Under the direction of user response application 199, user attached monitor device 110 requests a test start by the monitored individual (block 240). This request process may include, for example, initiating a visual and/or audio message to the monitored individual via speaker 2002 and/or display 159 of user attached monitor device 110. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of mechanisms for alerting the monitored individual to start a test. The monitored individual is prompted to accept the test by, for example, touching a start button on display 159 of user attached monitor device 110. It is determined whether the monitored individual accepted the test start (block 245) within sufficient time (i.e., some predetermined time limit to accept, such as, for example, one hour or less) (block 250). Where the monitored individual fails to accept the test start within the defined time (blocks 245, 250), a test fail for delay in accepting the test is reported to central monitoring station 160 (block 255).

Alternatively, where the monitored individual accepts the test (block 245), the test is performed (block 260). The test performance is shown in dashed lines as it is shown in greater detail in relation to FIG. 2b (alternative or additional tests are also described below in relation to FIGS. 8-11).

Turning now to FIG. 2b , a flow diagram 299 shows one implementation of a monitored individual response test that may be used in relation to one or more embodiments. Following flow diagram 299, a video is displayed to the monitored individual via display 159 of user attached monitor device 110 (block 202). The video is designed to include movement which engages and causes eye movement.

While the video is being played, image data from image sensor 2003 of user attached monitor device is captured (block 204). This image data captured via image sensor 2003 is compared with a file photograph of the monitored individual (block 206). The file photograph may have been taken, for example, when the monitored individual was originally assigned user attached monitor device 110. This file photo may be maintained locally on user attached monitor device 110 or may be provided to user attached monitor device 110 as part of the request to perform the test discussed above in relation to block 210 of FIG. 2 a.

It is determined whether the file photo matches the captured image (block 208). This may be done using any facial recognition technology known in the art. Where the file photo does not match the captured image (block 208), a face match fail is reported to the central monitoring station 160 (block 212). Otherwise, a continuing stream of image data captured by the image sensor 2003 is captured and stored to a memory in user attached monitor device 110 (block 214)(alternatively, it could be captured and streamed to the cloud). This continuously captured image data is used to detect eye movement patterns of the monitored individual which are time correlated with the video being watched by the monitored individual (block 216). The captured eye movement data is compared with previously determined eye movement data from the same individual (block 218). The previously determined eye movement data may have been obtained, for example, by applying the same test at the time that when the monitored individual was originally assigned user attached monitor device 110. This previously determined eye movement data may be maintained locally on user attached monitor device 110 or may be provided to user attached monitor device 110 as part of the request to perform the test discussed above in relation to block 210.

It is determined whether the recently captured eye movement data exhibits eye movement that is substantially greater than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 222). In some embodiments, substantially greater is more than ten percent increase in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially greater in accordance with other embodiments. Where the exhibited eye movement is substantially greater (block 222), it indicates the possibility of a stimulant resulting in a “greater than” fail being reported to the central monitoring station (block 226).

Alternatively, where the recently captured eye movement data does not exhibit eye movement that is substantially greater than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 222), it is determined whether the recently captured eye movement data exhibits eye movement that is substantially less than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 224). In some embodiments, substantially less is more than ten percent decrease in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially less in accordance with other embodiments. Where the eye movement is substantially less (block 224), it indicates the possibility of a depressant resulting in a “less than” fail is reported to the central monitoring station (block 232). Otherwise, a test pass is reported to the central monitoring station 160 (block 228).

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIGS. 2a-2b provide binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the exhibited eye movement deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for eye movement. Thus, for example, where the exhibited eye movement is identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme eye movement that either greatly exceeds the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement or is greatly less than the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the exhibited eye movement being identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement and the exhibited eye movement greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement.

Turning to FIG. 3, a flow diagram 300 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing a baseline impairment threshold for eye movement for a monitored individual using a user attached monitor device 110. Following flow diagram 300, a monitored individual baseline test for eye movement is selected (block 305). This test may be selected by sending a test request from the central monitoring station 160 to the user attached monitor device 110.

A video is displayed to the monitored individual via display 159 of user attached monitor device 110 (block 310). The video is designed to include movement which engages and causes eye movement. While the video is being played, data from image sensor 2003 of user attached monitor device 110 is captured continuously and stored to a memory in user attached monitor device 110 (block 315). This image data is used to detect eye movement patterns of the monitored individual which are time correlated with the video being watched by the monitored individual (block 320). The captured eye movement data is stored as previously determined eye movement data for the individual associated with the user attached monitor device 110 (block 325). In some cases, the previously determined eye movement data is maintained locally on user attached monitor device 110, and in other cases it is transferred to a central monitoring station 160. In various cases, the actual image data is not stored, but rather only determined and/or calculated eye movement data derived from the actual image data.

Turning to FIG. 4, a block diagram of a user impairment detection system 400 operated without connection or association with a user attached monitor device is shown in accordance with some embodiments. User impairment detection system 400 includes a baseline monitored individual eye movement detection system 420, a field monitored individual impairment detection system 470, and a database server 450.

Baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 includes a controller circuit 422 that may be, for example, a microprocessor or the like. Controller circuit 422 controls the operation of the various parts of baseline monitored individual eye movement detection system 420. Additionally, baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 includes sensors 423. Sensors 423 may include one or more sensors capable of sensing characteristics of an individual including, but not limited to, pulse rate sensors, respiration rate sensors, perspiration sensors, blood pressure sensors, image sensors, motion sensors, and the like. For this embodiment and those discussed below in relation to FIGS. 5-7, sensors 423 include a camera that is capable of capturing images of, for example, the face of a individual having a motor vehicle license with enough accuracy to discern eye movement over multiple captured images. A communication link 411 (wireless or wired) allows for communication between baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 and database server 450. A memory 424 stores data, a speaker 404 can be used to provide audible commands, and a visual display 408 can be used to display images to a licensed individual. Baseline eye movement detection application 428 includes various instructions executable by controller circuit 422 to perform the functions, among others, discussed below in relation to FIG. 5.

Field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 includes a controller circuit 472 that may be, for example a microprocessor or the like. Controller circuit 472 controls the operation of the various parts of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470. In some cases, field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is a cell phone or other wireless communication device carried by an officer in the field. Additionally, field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 includes sensors 473 that are capable of capturing one or more characteristics of the monitored individual including, but not limited to, pulse rate sensors, respiration rate sensors, perspiration sensors, blood pressure sensors, image sensors, motion sensors, and the like. For this embodiment and those discussed below in relation to FIGS. 5-7, sensors 473 include a camera that is capable of capturing images of, for example, the face of a individual having a motor vehicle license with enough accuracy to discern eye movement over multiple captured images. A communication link 461 (wireless or wired) allows for communication between field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 and database server 450. A memory 474 stores data, a speaker 454 can be used to provide audible commands, and a visual display 458 can be used to display images to a licensed individual. Field eye movement detection application 478 includes various instructions executable by controller circuit 472 to perform the functions, among others, discussed below in relation to FIGS. 6-11.

In some embodiments, database server 450 is communicably coupled to a historical database 401. Historical database 401 includes a variety of data corresponding to a monitored individual including, but not limited to, types of addictions and problems that the individual has had in the past, last incident of substance abuse and the type of substance used, physical locations visited by the monitored individual during a previous time period, other monitored individuals that the monitored individual has been in proximity to and the types of addictions and problems that the other monitored individuals have had in the past, triggering events that have preceded prior addiction relapses of the monitored individual, and/or recent scenarios that are similar to prior triggering events. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other historical data related to a monitored individual that may be maintained in historical database in accordance with various embodiments.

Turning to FIG. 5, a flow diagram 500 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing a baseline impairment threshold for eye movement for a licensed individual at, for example, a location where a driver's license is being issued. Following flow diagram 500, a video is displayed to the monitored individual via the visual display 408 of baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 at, for example, a driver's license issuing location (block 510). The video is designed to include movement which engages and causes eye movement. While the video is being played, data from a camera of sensors 423 of baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 is captured continuously and stored to a memory in baseline monitored individual impairment detection system 420 (block 515). This image data is used to detect eye movement patterns of the monitored individual which are time correlated with the video being watched by the licensed individual (block 520). The captured eye movement data is stored as previously determined eye movement data for the individual and associated with the individual's license (block 525). In some cases, the previously determined eye movement data is maintained on the database server 450 and is accessible using field monitored individual impairment detection system 470. In various cases, the actual image data is not stored, but rather only determined and/or calculated eye movement data derived from the actual image data.

Turning to FIG. 6, a flow diagram 600 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for using field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 for detecting monitored individual impairment that relies on a previously established baseline impairment threshold for eye movement specific to the monitored individual. Following flow diagram 600, an individual's identification is entered into field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 (block 610). This may be entered, for example, by an officer who is in the process of a traffic stop. The previously determined eye movement data for the licensed individual is downloaded from database server 450 to field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 in response to entering the individual's identification information in block 610 (block 615).

The field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is put in proximity to the face of the licensed individual and a video is displayed to the licensed individual via display 458 of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 (block 625). While the video is being played, data from a camera of sensors 473 of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is captured and stored as an eye movement video (block 630). This image data is used to detect eye movement patterns of the monitored individual which are time correlated with the video being watched by the monitored individual (block 635). The captured eye movement data is compared with previously determined eye movement data from the same individual (block 640). The previously determined eye movement data may have been obtained by applying the same test at the time when the monitored individual was, for example, obtaining a driver's license. Further, this baseline impairment threshold may be modified using a learning process similar to those discussed below in relation to FIG. 16 and FIG. 18.

It is determined whether eye movement exhibited in the recently captured eye movement data is substantially greater than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 642). In some embodiments, substantially greater is more than ten percent increase in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially greater in accordance with other embodiments. Where the eye movement is substantially greater (block 642), it indicates the possibility of a stimulant resulting in a “greater than” fail being reported to the central monitoring station (block 646).

Alternatively, where eye movement exhibited in the recently captured eye movement data is not substantially greater than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 642), it is determined whether the recently captured eye movement data is substantially less than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 644). In some embodiments, substantially less is more than ten percent decrease in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially less in accordance with other embodiments. Where the eye movement is substantially less (block 644), it indicates the possibility of a depressant resulting in a “less than” fail being reported to the central monitoring station (block 652). Otherwise, a test pass is reported (block 648).

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIG. 6 provides binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the exhibited eye movement deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for eye movement. Thus, for example, where the exhibited eye movement is identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme eye movement that either greatly exceeds the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement or is greatly less than the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the exhibited eye movement being identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement and the exhibited eye movement greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement.

Turning to FIG. 7, a flow diagram 700 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for using field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 for detecting monitored individual impairment without using a previously determined baseline impairment threshold for eye movement specific to a particular individual being tested. Following flow diagram 700, the field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is put in proximity to the face of the licensed individual and a video is displayed to the licensed individual via display 458 of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 (block 725). This may be done, for example, by a parent concerned about a child's status. While the video is being played, data from the camera 473 of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is captured and stored as an eye movement video (block 730). This image data is used to detect eye movement patterns of the monitored individual which are time correlated with the video being watched by the monitored individual (block 735). The captured eye movement data is compared with a general baseline impairment threshold for eye movement developed across a number of persons not necessarily connected with the monitored individual (block 740).

It is determined whether the recently captured eye movement data is substantially greater than that exhibited in the general eye movement baseline data (block 742). In some embodiments, substantially greater is more than ten percent increase in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially greater in accordance with other embodiments. Where the eye movement is substantially greater (block 742), it indicates the possibility of a stimulant and a “greater than” fail is reported (block 746).

Alternatively, where the recently captured eye movement data is not substantially greater than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 742), it is determined whether the recently captured eye movement data is substantially less than that exhibited in the previously determined eye movement data (block 744). In some embodiments, substantially less is more than ten percent decrease in eye movement. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of parameters that may be defined as substantially less in accordance with other embodiments. Where the eye movement is substantially less (block 744), it indicates the possibility of a depressant and a “less than” fail is reported (block 752). Otherwise, a test pass is reported (block 748).

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIG. 7 provides binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the exhibited eye movement deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for eye movement. Thus, for example, where the exhibited eye movement is identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme eye movement that either greatly exceeds the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement or is greatly less than the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the exhibited eye movement being identical to the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement and the exhibited eye movement greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for eye movement.

One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that a variety of use scenarios in addition to those discussed herein may be supported using one or more of the embodiments discussed herein. For example, a parent/guardian scenario may be supported allowing a parent/guardian to monitor a minor child. As another example, an alternative school may employ one or more embodiments to monitor expelled or struggling students. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize many other use scenarios.

Turning to FIG. 8a , a flow diagram 800 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing a monitored individual reaction via user attached monitor device 110. The method of flow diagram 800 may be used in addition to or separate from the eye movement monitoring methods discussed above in relation to FIGS. 2b and 6-7.

Following flow diagram 800, a reaction game is displayed via a display of a user attached monitor device 110 (block 802). This includes executing instructions by a controller or processor included in user attached monitor device 110 to cause the reaction game to load and display such that it is ready to be played by the monitored individual. The reaction game may be any game that engages the monitored individual in an activity that requires the monitored individual to react, and that measures the reaction of the monitored individual.

In one embodiment, the reaction game may require a monitored individual to tilt the user attached monitor device in three dimensions to move an object to a desired location on the display screen of the user attached monitor device. When engaging in such a reaction game, a monitored individual 880 holds their arm such that a user attached monitor device 899 attached to the arm is visible to the monitored individual while the monitored individual looks at a display 898 on user attached monitor device 899 as shown in FIG. 8b . While held this way, an image sensor 897 on user attached monitor device 899 is positioned to capture an image of the face of monitored individual 880.

Turning to FIG. 8c , a top view 889 of user attached monitor device 899 shows an example of such a tilt-based reaction game. As shown, a maze 890 is shown on display 898 with an object 894 at a beginning point 893 (shown in FIG. 8d ) that is to be moved from one part of maze 890 to an end point 896. The monitored individual tilts user attached monitor device 899 in three dimensions to cause object 894 to move within maze 890. Turning to FIG. 8d , a path 892 is shown along which object 894 is moved from beginning point 893 to ending point 896. As an example, an initial move from beginning point 893 includes tilting a top side 870 of user attached monitor device such that it is relatively lower than a bottom side 873 causing object 894 to move toward top side 870. This is followed by tilting a right side 871 of user attached monitor device 899 such that it is relatively lower than a left side 872 causing object 894 to move toward right side 810. This tilting process is continued to move object 894 along path 892.

In another embodiment, the reaction game may require a monitored individual to follow a moving cursor on a touch display of the user attached monitor device using their finger. When engaging in such a reaction game, a monitored individual 980 holds their arm such that a display 997 of a user attached monitor device 999 is visible to the monitored individual and can be touched by the other hand of the monitored individual as shown in FIG. 9a . While held this way, an image sensor 997 on user attached monitor device 999 is positioned to capture an image of the face of monitored individual 980. The user places a finger 985 on display 997 where it is poised to follow an object portrayed on the display.

Turning to FIG. 9b , a top view 989 of user attached monitor device 999 shows an example of such a cursor following reaction game. As shown, a target 982 is shown on display 998 and an object 996 is moved along a path 994 away from target 982. Monitored individual 980 is expected to use finger 985 to contact object 996 and move it back over target 982. Turning to FIG. 9c , a path 993 is shown along which object 996 is moved from a beginning point 992 (i.e., a point where monitored individual first touches object 996) to an ending point 991 (i.e., a point where monitored individual last touches object 996). A time (t) is measured from when object 996 first starts moving away from target 982 until object 996 is released by monitored individual 980 at ending point 991. In addition, a distance (d) from target 982 to ending point 991 is measured.

While two distinct reaction games that may be used in relation to different embodiments have been described herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of reaction games that may be implemented in accordance with different embodiments based upon the disclosure provided herein. Returning to FIG. 8a , while the monitored individual is engaged in the reaction game displayed on the user attached monitor device (block 802), data from the image sensor 2003 of user attached monitor device 110 or a camera 473 of field monitored individual impairment detection system 470 is captured (block 804). This image data captured via image sensor 2003 is compared with a file photograph of the monitored individual (block 806). The file photograph may have been taken when the monitored individual was originally assigned user attached monitor device 110 and/or user attached monitor device 110, or when the individual was being processed for a driver's license. This file photo may be maintained locally on user attached monitor device 110 or may be provided to user attached monitor device 110 as part of the request to perform the reaction test (similar to that discussed above in relation to block 235 or block 305).

It is determined whether the file photo matches the captured image (block 808). This may be done using any facial recognition technology known in the art. Where the file photo does not match the captured image (block 808), a face match fail is reported (block 812). This face match failure may be reported to a central monitoring station 160 where the user attached monitor device 110 is communicably coupled to such a central monitoring station, or may be displayed locally where the user attached monitor device 110 is a standalone device. In some cases, prior knowledge of the individual being tested is not available, the processes of blocks 804-812 can be skipped. As an example, where user attached monitor device 110 is a traffic patrol officer's device, the patrol officer may user the driver's license of the individual to verify the person taking the test, and image sensor 473 may capture an image of the individual taking the test that may be stored along with the results of the reaction test. This image stored with the test results could be used, for example, in a later court proceeding to verify the identity of the individual that took the test.

Where either the captured image matches the available image of the monitored individual (block 808) or the processes of blocks 804-812 are skipped, the reaction of the monitored individual while they play the reaction game is monitored and measured (block 814). Using the tilt game of FIGS. 8b-8d as an example, the time that it takes the monitored individual to move object 894 from beginning point 893 to ending point 896 is measured. Alternatively, or in addition, the number of over tilts causing deviation from path 892 are counted. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of measurements that may be made while the monitored individual plays the tilt game which may be used to indicate whether the individual is experiencing some level of impairment. Using the cursor follow game of FIGS. 9a-9c as an example, the time that it takes the monitored individual to first touch object 996 may be measured, the time that it takes the monitored individual to move object 996 to ending point 991 may be measured, and/or the distance from ending point 991 to target 982 may be measured. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of measurements that may be made while the monitored individual plays the cursor follow game which may be used to indicate whether the individual is experiencing some level of impairment.

The measurements of the monitored individual's play of the reaction game are compared with either a predefined baseline impairment threshold for reaction time specific to the monitored individual or to a baseline impairment threshold for reaction time baseline generic to multiple users (block 816). For example, where the monitored individual is on parole, part of the terms of their release may be that they play the reaction games many times in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. As another example, the monitored individual may be applying for a driver's license and as part of that process they are required to play the reaction games many times in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. Alternatively, results that would be expected for a broad range of users may be established and used for comparison purposes. The results may be used to establish an expected baseline of measurements to which later test results may be compared. These results may be maintained on the user attached device or may be downloaded on demand to the user attached device. Further, these baseline impairment thresholds may be modified using a learning process similar to those discussed below in relation to FIG. 16 and FIG. 18.

Where the comparison of the results from the monitored individual's play of the reaction game are similar to the baseline (block 824), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely unimpaired and thus the individual passes (block 828). This pass result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device 110. Alternatively, where the comparison of the results from the monitored individual's play of the reaction game substantially deviate from the baseline (block 824), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely impaired and thus the individual fails (block 832). In some embodiments, a substantial deviation is more than ten percent greater or less than the baseline measurement. In various embodiments, a substantial deviation is more than twenty percent greater or less than the baseline measurement. In some embodiments, a substantial deviation is more than thirty percent greater or less than the baseline measurement. In various embodiments, a substantial deviation is more than fifty percent greater or less than the baseline measurement. The fail result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device.

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIG. 8a provides binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the sensed reaction time deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for reaction time. Thus, for example, where the exhibited reaction time is identical to the baseline impairment threshold for reaction time, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme delay in reaction time greatly exceeds the baseline impairment threshold for reaction time, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the reaction time being similar or less than the baseline impairment threshold for reaction time eye movement and the exhibited reaction time greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for reaction time, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for reaction time.

Turning to FIG. 20a , a flow diagram 2000 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an ability of a monitored individual to balance via a user attached monitor device 110 while the monitored individual is standing on one leg. The method of flow diagram 2000 may be used in addition to or separate from the eye movement monitoring methods discussed above in relation to FIGS. 2b and 6-7.

Following flow diagram 2000, a request for the monitored individual to stand on one foot is displayed via a display on user attached monitor device 110 (block 2002). The request additionally requires that the monitored individual extend their arm such that the user attached monitor device is away from their body and to hold the user attached monitor device such that the image sensor on the user attached monitor device can take an image of the monitored individual showing both the identity of the monitored individual, the location of the user attached monitor device relative to the monitored individual, and that the individual is standing on a single foot. Turning to FIG. 20b , a monitored individual 2080 is shown extending their arm such that a user attached monitor device 2099 is away from the body of monitored individual 2080. User attached monitor device 2099 is oriented such that an image sensor 2097 on user attached monitor device 2099 can see (either in a single image or across a series of images) the face of user attached monitor device 2099 and that one leg 2083 of monitored individual 2080 is lifted to hold a foot off the ground, and the other leg 2082 is supported by a foot on the ground. Accelerometers included as part of user attached monitor device 2099 determine whether the device is tipping in three dimensions (shown as an x, a y, and a z axis). Another approach would be to request the individual stand on both feet, a measurement is taken, then asked to lift one leg, a measurement is taken, then asked to lower leg, a measurement is taken.

Returning to FIG. 20a , data is accessed from the image sensor on the user attached monitor device (block 2004). This data is used to ascertain the identity of the monitored individual, to assure that the user attached monitor device is held away from the body, and that the monitored individual is standing on a single foot (block 2006). Where it is determined that the conditions of the test have not yet been met (block 2006), it is determined whether the monitored individual has been given enough time to comply with the conditions of the test (block 2008). Where enough time has passed (block 2008), a compliance fail is indicated (block 2010). This compliance fail may be transmitted to a central monitoring station or it may simply be recorded and displayed to the monitored individual via a display of the user attached monitor device.

Alternatively, where the test conditions are met (block 2006), the accelerometers or other motion sensors included in the user attached monitor device are monitored to determine how much the user attached monitor device is tilting and/or moving while the monitored individual stands on one foot (block 2012). This monitoring continues for a defined period of time. The data recorded from the accelerometers or other motion sensors while the monitored individual stands on a single foot is compared with either a predefined baseline impairment threshold for balance specific to the monitored individual or to a standard baseline impairment threshold for balance that is generic to multiple users (block 2014). For example, where the monitored individual is on parole, part of the terms of their release may be that they stand on a single foot while similar accelerometer data is recorded under similar conditions and in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. As another example, the monitored individual may be applying for a driver's license and as part of that process they are required to stand on a single foot while similar accelerometer data is recorded under similar conditions and in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. The results may be used to establish an expected baseline impairment threshold for balance to which later test results may be compared. These results may be maintained on the user attached device or may be downloaded on demand to the user attached device. Further, this baseline impairment threshold may be modified using a learning process similar to those discussed below in relation to FIG. 16 and FIG. 18.

Where the comparison of the results from the monitored individual's stability while standing on a single foot are similar to the baseline impairment threshold for balance (block 2016), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely unimpaired and thus the individual passes (block 2020). This pass result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device. Alternatively, where the comparison of the results from testing the monitored individual indicate a stability that is substantially lower than the baseline impairment threshold for balance (block 2016), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely impaired and thus the individual fails (block 2018). In some embodiments, substantially lower stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than ten percent increase in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. In various embodiments, substantially lower stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than twenty percent increase in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. In some embodiments, substantially lower stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than thirty percent increase in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. In various embodiments, substantially lower stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than fifty percent increase in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. The fail result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device.

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIG. 20a provides binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the exhibited balance deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for balance. Thus, for example, where the exhibited balance is identical to or better than the baseline impairment threshold for balance, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme balance issues are sensed that greatly exceed the baseline impairment threshold for balance, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the exhibited balance being similar or better than the baseline impairment threshold for balance and the exhibited balance greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for balance, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for balance.

Turning to FIG. 11a , a flow diagram 1100 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for capturing an ability of a monitored individual to balance via a user attached monitor device while the monitored individual is walking. The method of flow diagram 1100 may be used in addition to or separate from the eye movement monitoring methods discussed above in relation to FIGS. 2b and 6-7.

Following flow diagram 1100, a request for the monitored individual to start walking is provided via a display of user attached monitor device 110 (block 1102). The request additionally requires that the monitored individual hold the user attached monitor device away from their body and orient the user attached monitor device such that the image sensor on the user attached monitor device can take an image of the monitored individual showing both the identity of the monitored individual, the location of the user attached monitor device relative to the monitored individual, and that the individual is walking. Turning to FIG. 11b , a monitored individual 1180 is shown holding their arm away from their body 1180 while they are walking in a direction 1181. User attached monitor device 1199 is oriented such that an image sensor 1197 on user attached monitor device 1199 can see (either in a single image or across a series of images) the face of user 1180 and that one leg 1183 is moving relative to another leg 1182 in a pattern indicative of walking. Accelerometers included as part of user attached monitor device 1199 determine whether the device is tipping in three dimensions (shown as an x, a y, and a z axis).

Returning to FIG. 11a , data is accessed from the image sensor on the user attached monitor device (block 1104). This data is used to ascertain the identity of the monitored individual, to assure that the user attached monitor device is held away from the body, and that the monitored individual is walking (block 1106). Where it is determined that the conditions of the test have not yet been met (block 1106), it is determined whether the monitored individual has been given enough time to comply with the conditions of the test (block 1108). Where enough time has passed (block 1108), a compliance fail is indicated (block 1110). This compliance fail may be transmitted to a central monitoring station or it may simply be recorded and displayed to the monitored individual via a display of the user attached monitor device.

Alternatively, where the test conditions are met (block 1106), the eye movement and facial expressions of the monitored individual are captured using the image sensor in the user attached monitor device (block 1112). These images may be stored local in the user attached monitor device and/or transmitted to a central monitoring station. This video data may be used, for example, in a later legal proceeding where a monitored individual is attempting to refute the evidence gathered via the user attached monitor device.

The accelerometers included in the user attached monitor device are monitored to determine how much the user attached monitor device is tilting and/or moving while the monitored individual is walking (block 1114). In sum, the gait of the monitored individual is monitored and one or more characteristics of the gait is quantified. This monitoring continues for a defined period of time or counted number of steps (steps may be automatically identified using the data from the accelerometers in the same way a commercially available pedometer identifies steps). The data recorded from the accelerometers while the monitored individual walks is compared with either a predefined baseline impairment threshold for gait that is specific to the monitored individual or to a baseline impairment threshold for gait that is generic to multiple users (block 1116). For example, where the monitored individual is on parole, part of the terms of their release may be that they walk while similar accelerometer data is recorded under similar conditions and in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. As another example, the monitored individual may be applying for a driver's license and as part of that process they are required to walk while similar accelerometer data is recorded under similar conditions and in a controlled situation where it is known that they are not impaired. The results may be used to establish an expected baseline of measurements to which later test results may be compared. These results may be maintained on the user attached device or may be downloaded on demand to the user attached device. Further, this baseline impairment threshold may be modified using a learning process similar to those discussed below in relation to FIG. 16 and FIG. 18.

Where the comparison of the results from the monitored individual's stability while walking is similar to the baseline impairment threshold for gait (block 1118), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely unimpaired and thus the individual passes (block 1110). This pass result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device. Alternatively, where the comparison of the results from testing the monitored individual indicate a stability that is substantially different than the baseline impairment threshold for gait (block 1118), the test indicates that the monitored individual is likely impaired and thus the individual fails (block 1122). In some embodiments, substantially different stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than ten percent increase or decrease in movement when compared with the baseline impairment threshold for gait. In various embodiments, substantially different stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than twenty percent increase or decrease in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. In some embodiments, a substantially different stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than thirty percent increase or decrease in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. In various embodiments, substantially different stability is indicated when the accelerometers indicate more than fifty percent increase or decrease in movement when compared with the baseline measurement. The fail result may be transmitted to central monitoring station 160 or may simply be recorded and displayed locally via the user attached monitor device.

It is noted that while the embodiment discussed in relation to FIG. 11a provides binary pass/fail outputs that the approaches may be modified to provide a likelihood of impairment value that is a function of how much the exhibited gait deviates from a baseline impairment threshold for gait. Thus, for example, where the exhibited balance is identical to or better than the baseline impairment threshold for gait, a likelihood of impairment value of zero (0) percent may be reported. In contrast, where extreme balance issues are sensed that greatly exceed the baseline impairment threshold for gait, a likelihood of impairment value of near one hundred (100) percent may be reported. For all points between the exhibited balance being similar or better than the baseline impairment threshold for gait and the exhibited balance greatly deviating from the baseline impairment threshold for gait, a value between zero (0) and one hundred (100) percent is reported depending upon how far the deviation is from the baseline impairment threshold for gait.

Turning to FIG. 12, a flow diagram 1200 shows a method for recognizing or calculating impairment based at least in part on two or more impairment tests in accordance with some embodiments. Following flow diagram 1200, it is determined whether impairment is indicated based upon an eye movement test (block 1205). The eye movement test may be performed, for example, similar to that discussed above in relation to any of FIG. 2b , FIG. 6, or FIG. 7. Where an eye movement test indicates impairment (block 1205), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1210). In some embodiments, a monitored individual is only considered to be impaired where two or more tests indicate impairment. Thus, in such an embodiment, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment to sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In other embodiments, a monitored individual is considered impaired where only a single test deviates significantly from a baseline impairment threshold for the particular test, or where two or more tests deviate at least slightly from the baseline impairment threshold for the respective tests. Thus, where a single test deviates significantly, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment to one hundred, thirty (130) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Alternatively, where only a slight deviation is indicated, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment to sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In some embodiments, a significant deviation is a deviation of fifteen (15) percent or more, and a slight deviation is a deviation of less than fifteen (15) percent. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of deviations that may be considered slight or significant and/or a number of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments.

Where an eye movement test does not indicate impairment (block 1205), the likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is reduced slightly (block 1212). In some embodiments, this slight decrease may be ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of decreases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Eye movement-based impairment is not indicated where the measured eye movement is within the baseline impairment threshold for the particular test.

It is determined whether impairment is indicated based upon a balance test (block 1215). The balance test may be performed, for example, similar to that discussed above in relation to any of FIG. 20a or FIG. 11a . Where a balance test indicates impairment (block 1215), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1220). Again, in some embodiments, a monitored individual is only considered to be impaired where two or more tests indicate impairment. Thus, in such an embodiment, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In other embodiments, a monitored individual is considered impaired where only a single test deviates significantly from a baseline impairment threshold for the particular test, or where two or more tests deviate at least slightly from the baseline impairment threshold for the respective tests. Thus, where a single test deviates significantly, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment to one hundred, thirty (130) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Alternatively, where only a slight deviation is indicated, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In some embodiments, a significant deviation is a deviation of fifteen (15) percent or more, and a slight deviation is a deviation of less than fifteen (15) percent. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of deviations that may be considered slight or significant and/or a number of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments.

Where a balance test does not indicate impairment (block 1215), the likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is reduced slightly (block 1222). In some embodiments, this slight decrease may be ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of decreases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Balance based impairment is not indicated where the measured balance is within the baseline impairment threshold for the particular test.

It is determined whether impairment is indicated based upon a reaction test (block 1225). The reaction test may be performed, for example, similar to that discussed above in relation to any of FIGS. 8-9. Where a reaction test indicates impairment (block 1225), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1230). Again, in some embodiments, a monitored individual is only considered to be impaired where two or more tests indicate impairment. Thus, in such an embodiment, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In other embodiments, a monitored individual is considered impaired where only a single test deviates significantly from a baseline impairment threshold for the particular test, or where two or more tests deviate at least slightly from the baseline impairment threshold for the respective tests. Thus, where a single test deviates significantly, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment to one hundred, thirty (130) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Alternatively, where only a slight deviation is indicated, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by sixty (60) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. In some embodiments, a significant deviation is a deviation of fifteen (15) percent or more, and a slight deviation is a deviation of less than fifteen (15) percent. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of deviations that may be considered slight or significant and/or a number of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments.

Where a reaction test does not indicate impairment (block 1225), the likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is reduced slightly (block 1232). In some embodiments, this slight decrease may be ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of decreases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Reaction based impairment is not indicated where the measured reaction is within the baseline impairment threshold for the particular test.

The calculated likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual is reported to a monitoring officer (block 1250). This reporting may be done, for example, by sending a text message or a voice message to the monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to report the finding of a likelihood of impairment to the monitoring officer.

Turning to FIG. 13, a flow diagram 1300 shows a method for predicting impairment based at least in part on historical data associated with a monitored individual in accordance with some embodiments. Following flow diagram 1300, it is determined whether an active and/or passive impairment test was completed such that results (e.g., a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired) are available (block 1305). Such passive impairment tests may include, but are limited to, monitoring a monitored individual's gait while they are walking without commanding the individual to walk so that the monitoring can take place. a change in respiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, a change in perspiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, a change in pulse rate outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, red eye detection done using an image sensor on a user attached monitor device without commanding the monitored individual to use the image sensor, and/or a change in activity level of the monitored individual. Active impairment tests may include, but is not limited to, balance monitoring during a period that the monitored individual is engaged in a commanded activity, reaction monitoring during a period that the monitored individual is engaged in a commanded activity, and/or eye movement monitoring. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of passive and active impairment tests that may be applied either separately or in combination to discern likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual.

Where impairment test results are available (block 1305), it is determined whether historical data is available for the individual (block 1310). Such historical data includes, but is not limited to, types of addictions and problems that the individual has had in the past, last incident of substance abuse and the type of substance used, physical locations visited by the monitored individual during a previous time period, other monitored individuals that the monitored individual has been in proximity to and the types of addictions and problems that the other monitored individuals have had in the past, triggering events that have preceded prior addiction relapses of the monitored individual, and/or recent scenarios that are similar to prior triggering events. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other historical data related to a monitored individual that may be maintained in historical database in accordance with various embodiments.

Where historical data is available (block 1310), it is determined from the historical data whether the monitored individual has been in close proximity to a known source of a substance (block 1315). This may be discerned, for example, based upon tracking information available on the source and/or based upon locations known to be frequented by a source. The source may be, for example, a known drug distributor.

Where the monitored individual has been in close proximity to a source of a substance within a defined period (e.g., one week) (block 1315), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1320). In some embodiments, this increase in likelihood of impairment is minor compared with an increase done because of failure of one or more active or passive impairment tests. In some embodiments, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Alternatively, where the monitored individual has not been in close proximity to a source of a substance within a defined period (e.g., one week) (block 1315), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is decreased (block 1322). In some embodiments, the decrease may be one (1) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer.

It is determined whether the monitored individual has a known substance addiction (block 1325). Where the monitored individual has a known substance addiction (block 1325), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1330). In some embodiments, this increase in likelihood of impairment is minor compared with an increase done because of failure of one or more active or passive impairment tests. In some embodiments, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by twenty-five (25) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Alternatively, where the monitored individual is not known to have a substance addiction (block 1325), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is decreased (block 1332). In some embodiments, the decrease may be ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer.

It is determined whether the monitored individual has recently traveled in an area known for having substances available (block 1335). Where the monitored individual has recently traveled in an area known for having substances available (block 1335), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is increased (block 1340). In some embodiments, this increase in likelihood of impairment is minor compared with an increase done because of failure of one or more active or passive impairment tests. In some embodiments, increasing the likelihood of impairment includes raising the likelihood of impairment by ten (10) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of increases in the likelihood of impairment that may be applied in accordance with different embodiments. Alternatively, where the monitored individual has not recently traveled in an area known for having substances available (block 1335), a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired is decreased (block 1342). In some embodiments, the decrease may be one (1) percent of what would be required to consider the monitored individual likely impaired and to alert a monitoring officer.

The calculated likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual is reported to a monitoring officer (block 1350). This reporting may be done, for example, by sending a text message or a voice message to the monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to report the finding of a likelihood of impairment to the monitoring officer.

Turning to FIG. 14, a block diagram of a multi-tiered impairment detection system 1800 is shown in accordance with various embodiments. Multi-tiered impairment detection system 1800 is capable of passive impairment monitoring of an individual to determine a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired. As used herein, the phrase “passive impairment monitoring” is used in its broadest sense to refer to any monitoring that is done in the normal course of a monitored individual's activities such that the monitored individual is not commanded to engage in a particular activity to facilitate the monitoring. Thus, as one of many examples, passive impairment monitoring may include monitoring a monitored individual's gait while they are walking without commanding the individual to walk so that the monitoring can take place. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of passive impairment monitoring that may be used in accordance with different embodiments including, but not limited to, a change in respiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, a change in perspiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, a change in pulse rate outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the monitored individual, red eye detection, a change in activity level of the monitored individual, and/or the location of a monitored individual at or near a location where alcohol or other impairing substances are known to be consumed. In some cases, the passive impairment testing is done in accordance with the methods discussed below in relation to FIGS. 14-15. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of passive impairment tests that may be applied either separately or in combination to discern likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual.

Multi-tiered impairment detection system 1800 is capable of active impairment monitoring that may be triggered, in some embodiments, based at least in part on results from passive impairment monitoring of the monitored individual. In contrast to passive impairment monitoring, the phrase “active impairment monitoring” is used in its broadest sense to refer to any monitoring where the monitored individual is commanded to perform a particular activity and the monitoring occurs in relation to the particular activity. Such active impairment monitoring may include, but is not limited to, monitoring stability of monitored individual as the monitored individual is walking or otherwise moving as directed in the test, monitoring individual's reaction time as directed in a test, and/or monitoring individual's eye movement as the individual watches a defined video program. Other active impairment tests may be used either separately or in combination with one or more of the aforementioned tests and include, but are not limited to, changes in pulse rate, changes in body temperature, changes in breathing, and/or perspiration. In some cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 3. In various cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 8a-8d and/or FIGS. 8 and 9 a-9 c. In some cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 20a-10b . In one or more cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 11a-11b . In various cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 12. In various cases, the active impairment testing may be augmented to include historical based data similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 13. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of active impairment tests that may be applied either separately or in combination.

Multi-tiered impairment detection system 1800 may be implemented as part of a stand-alone testing system similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 4 in which case the modules may be implemented in software or firmware executing on controller circuit 472, and/or as part of a testing system including a user attached monitor device similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 1a-1c . In such a case, the modules may be implemented in software or firmware executing on controller circuit 167.

A passive impairment detection module 1805 receives sensed data 1897 from one or more sensors included as part of individual monitoring sensors 1895 and historical data 1892 received from a historical database 1890. Historical database 1890 includes a variety of data corresponding to a monitored individual including, but not limited to, types of addictions and problems that the individual has had in the past, last incident of substance abuse and the type of substance used, physical locations visited by the monitored individual during a previous time period, other monitored individuals that the monitored individual has been in proximity to and the types of addictions and problems that the other monitored individuals have had in the past, triggering events that have preceded prior addiction relapses of the monitored individual, and/or recent scenarios that are similar to prior triggering events. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other historical data related to a monitored individual that may be maintained in historical database in accordance with various embodiments. Individual monitoring sensors 1895 may include a variety of sensors designed to detect different characteristics of a monitored individual. Such sensors may include, but are not limited to, a image sensor, a motion detector (including, for example, one or more accelerometers), a respiration sensor, a blood pressure sensor, a pulse rate sensor, a microphone, a temperature sensor, and/or an alcohol detection sensor. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of other sensors and/or combinations of sensors that may be incorporated in individual monitoring sensors 1895 in accordance with different embodiments.

In addition, passive impairment detection module 1805 receives one or more baseline threshold values 1817 from a passive impairment threshold learning module 1815. Baseline threshold values 1817 are used to compare with impairment information created by passive impairment detection module 1805 based upon sensed data 1897. Thus, for example, where the passive impairment monitoring is limited to the gait of the monitored individual, passive impairment detection module 1805 receives acceleration data as sensed data 1897 from one or more accelerometers included in individual monitoring sensors 1895. Passive impairment detection module 1805 uses this acceleration data to, for example, calculate lateral acceleration per step for the monitored individual. This calculated lateral acceleration per step is compared with a baseline gait threshold value received as baseline threshold values 1817. In some cases, the baseline gait threshold value includes a range of lateral acceleration per step values between an upper value and lower value between which the sensed lateral acceleration per step calculated by passive impairment detection module 1805 based upon sensed data 1897 is compared.

The comparison of the calculated value with the baseline gait threshold value performed by passive impairment detection module 1805 determines whether the sensed data indicates that the monitored individual is within a range that indicates non-impairment or is outside of the range indicating that the monitored individual is potentially impaired. Where the monitored individual is outside of the range of the baseline threshold values 1817, a likelihood of impairment value 1808 is provided to an active impairment detection module 1810 for further testing and monitoring. In some embodiments, passive impairment detection module 1805 operates similar to that discussed below in relation to FIG. 15.

The difference between baseline threshold values 1817 and the sensed and calculated characteristic of the monitored individual calculated by passive impairment detection module 1805 based upon sensed data 1897 (e.g., lateral acceleration per step) for the monitored individual is provided as a passive difference value 1807 to passive impairment threshold learning module 1815. Passive impairment threshold learning module 1815 also receives an active impairment value 1812 from an active impairment detection module 1810 and an initial passive threshold 1802. In some embodiments, initial passive threshold 1802 may be a generalized baseline threshold applied to a number of individuals for the particular characteristic to which it is applied. In other cases, the initial passive threshold 1802 may be measured, for example, at the time that a user attached monitor device is attached to the monitored individual. In such a measurement case, the measured value may then be defined with a lower limit of eighty-five (85) percent of the measured value and an upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the measured value. Using the example above where the initial baseline gait threshold is expressed as lateral acceleration per step, the monitored individual could be asked to walk a straight line and the average lateral acceleration per step is measured/calculated. The upper and lower limits are then calculated and stored for later use in determining impairment.

In some embodiments, passive impairment threshold learning module 1815 merely passes initial passive threshold 1802 through as baseline threshold values 1817. In other embodiments, passive impairment threshold learning module 1815 automatically adjusts initial passive threshold 1802 based upon a combination of one or more of passive difference value 1807 and/or active impairment value 1812. In some embodiments, the adjustment is done similar to that discussed below in relation to FIG. 16.

Active impairment detection module 1810 uses likelihood of impairment value 1808 to determine whether additional active impairment testing is warranted. In particular, active impairment detection module 1810 compares likelihood of impairment value 1808 with a predetermined threshold. In some cases, the predetermined threshold is user programmable. Where likelihood of impairment value 1808 exceeds the predetermined threshold, active impairment detection module 1810 begins active impairment testing. Where active impairment testing is to be performed, active impairment detection module 1810 sends a request 1814 to a monitored individual alert module 1885. In turn, monitored individual alert module 1885 notifies the monitored individual to begin active impairment testing. Any process may be used to request that the monitored individual engage in active impairment testing including, but not limited to, sending a text message or a voice message to the monitored individual via a user attached monitor device. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to notify the monitored individual to begin an active impairment test.

The notice provided to the monitored individual to begin active impairment testing includes an indication to accept the active testing. An acceptance input 1887 is provided from monitored individual alert module 1885 to active impairment detection module 1810 indicating whether the monitored individual has accepted the request to begin monitoring. Active impairment detection module 1810 waits a defined time period to receive an acceptance via acceptance input 1887. Where the monitored individual fails to accept the test start within the defined time, active impairment detection module 1810 increases a likelihood of impairment value 1813 for the monitored individual and provides likelihood of impairment value 1813 to a monitoring officer alert reporting module 1830.

Monitoring officer alert reporting module 1830 determines whether likelihood of impairment value 1813 warrants sending an alert to a monitoring officer assigned to the monitored individual. This includes comparing likelihood of impairment value 1813 with a predetermined or user programmable threshold. Where likelihood of impairment value 1813 exceeds the predetermined or user programmable threshold, the monitoring officer is alerted by providing likelihood of impairment value 1813 as a report to a monitoring officer 1803 assigned to the monitored individual. Any process may be used to provide report 1803 to the monitoring officer including, but not limited to, sending a text message or a voice message to the monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to notify the monitoring officer. In some embodiments, where the monitored individual fails to respond to the request for active testing sent by monitored individual alert module 1885, likelihood of impairment value 1813 is increased to a value that will strongly encourage the monitoring officer to contact the monitored individual directly.

Alternatively, where acceptance input 1887 indicates acceptance of active impairment monitoring by the monitored individual, active impairment detection module 1810 sends commands via request 1814 and monitored individual alert module 1885 indicating one or more activities in which the monitored individual is commanded to engage. The command, for example, may indicate that: the monitored individual is to walk a straight line while holding a user attached monitor device or stand-alone testing device such that the straight line can be seen; the monitored individual is to watch a video display on a user attached monitor device or stand-alone testing device; the monitored individual is to play a video game on a user attached monitor device or stand-alone testing device, or the like. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of commands that may be provided to the monitored individual to engage them in an activity that facilitates active impairment monitoring.

Active impairment detection module 1810 may perform active impairment testing similar to that discussed above in relation to one or more of FIG. 3, FIGS. 8a-8d , FIGS. 8a and 9a-9c , FIGS. 20a-10b , FIGS. 11a-11b , FIG. 12, and/or FIG. 13. In one embodiment, active impairment detection module 1810 receives sensed data 1897 from one or more sensors included as part of individual monitoring sensors 1895 while the monitored individual is engaged in the commanded activity, and historical data 1892 from historical database 1890. In addition, active impairment detection module 1810 receives one or more baseline threshold values 1827 from an active impairment threshold learning module 1825. Baseline threshold values 1827 are used to compare with impairment information created by active impairment detection module 1810 based upon sensed data 1897. Thus, for example, where the active impairment monitoring is limited to the eye movement of the monitored individual, active impairment detection module 1810 receives image data showing the eyes of the monitored individual captured while the monitored individual watches the displayed video. From this, active impairment detection module 1810 determines characteristics of the eyes of the monitored individual and calculates, for example, an average eye movement per time interval value for the monitored individual. Active impairment detection module 1810 compares the value calculated based upon sensed data 1897 with baseline threshold values 1827. The results of the comparison are used to calculate an active likelihood of impairment value. For example, where a calculated average eye movement per time interval value greatly exceeds or is significantly lower than baseline threshold values 1827, the active likelihood of impairment value is set to a high value indicating a high probability that the monitored individual is impaired. Alternatively, where a calculated average eye movement per time interval value only slightly exceeds or is only slightly lower than baseline threshold values 1827, the active likelihood of impairment value is set to a lower value indicating some probability that the monitored individual is impaired. Where, however, other factors such as oversleeping determined based upon historical data 1892 or proximity to a location where impairing substances are known to be sold or used is indicated in historical data 1892, the active likelihood of impairment value is increased to indicate a high probability that the monitored individual is impaired. This active likelihood of impairment value is provided as a likelihood of impairment value 1813 to monitoring officer alert reporting module 1830 which operates as previously described. In addition, the active likelihood of impairment value is reported as active impairment value 1812 to both passive impairment threshold learning module 1815 and active impairment threshold learning module 1825.

Active impairment threshold learning module 1825 also receives an initial active threshold 1801 and a monitoring officer input 1838 from a monitoring officer impairment status receiving module 1835. In some embodiments, initial active threshold 1801 may be a generalized baseline threshold applied to a number of individuals for the particular characteristic to which it is applied. In other cases, the initial active threshold 1801 may be measured, for example, at the time that a user attached monitor device is attached to the monitored individual. In such a measurement case, the measured value may then be defined with a lower limit of eighty-five (85) percent of the measured value and an upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the measured value.

In some embodiments, active impairment threshold learning module 1825 merely passes initial active threshold 1801 through as baseline threshold values 1827. In other embodiments, active impairment threshold learning module 1825 automatically adjusts initial active threshold 1801 based upon a combination of one or more of active impairment value 1812 and/or monitoring officer input 1838. In some embodiments, the adjustment is done similar to that discussed below in relation to FIG. 18.

When a monitoring officer intervenes with the monitored individual based upon a report 1803 received from monitoring officer alert reporting module 1830, the monitoring officer makes a determination as to whether the monitored individual is impaired or not. This determination is provided as a monitoring officer impairment finding 1804 that is received by monitoring officer impairment status receiving module 1835. Monitoring officer impairment status receiving module 1835 may be any circuit, device and/or software process that is capable of receiving a binary input and providing that binary input as monitoring officer input 1838 to active impairment threshold learning module 1825.

Turning to FIG. 15, a flow diagram 1400 shows a method for passive impairment testing in accordance with some embodiments. In using this method, a likelihood of impairment value for a monitored individual is initially set to a default value which, in some cases, may be zero. As a monitored individual operates in their normal course of activity, their gait is repeatedly sensed and calculated. The gait may be sensed using accelerometers in one or both of a user attached monitored device and/or a user attached monitor device. In some cases, the gait is defined as a lateral acceleration (an acceleration measured normal to the direction of a step) per step. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize various other components of gait in addition to or alternative to side to side motion evident as an individual walks that can be used in relation to different embodiments to determine a meaningful change in gait. For example, gait may include, but is not limited to, walking speed, number of steps per minute, and variance between successive steps that may be used either as an alternative to or in addition to the aforementioned lateral acceleration per step.

Further, while the method discussed in relation to FIG. 15 relies heavily upon an individual's gait to passively determine a likelihood of impairment, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other passive tests that may be used in addition to gait or as an alternative to gait. For example, passive impairment testing may include detection of eye redness anytime the monitored individual, for example, looks at a user attached monitor device in their normal course of activity. In such a case, when a monitored individual touches a display of a user attached monitor device an image sensor in the user attached monitor device may be activated to capture an image of the monitored individual's face. Red eye detection may be used in relation to historical data showing that, for example, the monitored individual did not sleep the night before and was out moving, thus increasing the possibility the red eye was from lack of sleep and not a chemical impairment. As yet another example, passive impairment may be indicated when a monitored individual has not been moving (e.g., is passed out) for an above normal period of time. Such immobility may be mitigated by, for example, elevated body temperature indicative of perhaps physical illness rather than a chemically induced impairment. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other passive tests that may be used.

Following flow diagram 1400, it is determined whether the sensed and calculated gait of a monitored individual has changed when compared with a baseline gait threshold for the monitored individual (block 1405). The baseline gait threshold includes a range of gait values between an upper value and lower value between which the monitoring of the monitored individual's gait is not considered worthy of additional attention. When the gait of the monitored individual is determined to be outside of the threshold range, additional attention to the potential that the monitored individual is impaired is desirable. Using the example where gait is defined as the sway from side to side as an individual is walking forward and is expressed as lateral acceleration per step, the baseline gait threshold may define a lower limit of lateral acceleration per step and an upper limit of lateral acceleration per step between which the monitored individual is considered to be normal. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize various other components of gait that may be expressed in a baseline gait threshold.

In some cases, the initial baseline gait threshold may be a generalized baseline gait threshold applied to a number of individuals. In other cases, the initial baseline gait threshold may be measured, for example, at the time that a user attached monitor device is attached to the monitored individual. The baseline gait threshold may then be defined with a lower limit of eighty-five (85) percent of the measured value and an upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the measured value. Using the example above where the initial baseline gait threshold is expressed as lateral acceleration per step, the monitored individual could be asked to walk a straight line and the average lateral acceleration per step is measured/calculated. The upper and lower limits are then calculated and stored for later use in determining impairment. Where the initial baseline gait threshold is a general value or is measured for the monitored individual, in some embodiments the baseline gait threshold can be automatically adjusted over time using a learning algorithm such as that described below in relation to FIG. 16.

Where it is determined that the sensed and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is less than or greater than the baseline gait threshold (block 1405), a likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased as a function of the change in gait (block 1410). Thus, for example, where the sensed and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is much larger than the baseline gait threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased by a large amount. In contrast, where the sensed and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is only slightly larger than the baseline gait threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased by a small amount. The large amount may be sufficient by itself to trigger additional active impairment testing. In contrast, the small amount may be insufficient by itself to trigger additional active impairment testing, but when coupled with other factors may be raised to a level that would trigger additional active impairment testing.

In one particular embodiment, where the measured and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual exceeds the upper limit of the baseline gait threshold by more than ten (10) percent or the measured and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is less than ninety (90) percent of the lower limit of the baseline gait threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is set to the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing. Alternatively, where the measured and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual exceeds the upper limit of the baseline gait threshold by less than or equal to ten (10) percent or the measured and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is more than or equal to ninety (90) percent of the lower limit of the baseline gait threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is set to seventy-five (75) percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other functions for defining the likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual.

Where the measured and/or calculated gait of the monitored individual is between the upper limit of the baseline gait threshold and the lower limit of the baseline gait threshold (block 1405), the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual is decreased by a default amount (block 1412). This default amount may be, for example, twenty-five (25) percent of the current likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other default values by which the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual is decreased in accordance with different embodiments.

It is determined whether the monitored individual has been reasonably immobile or less active for a defined period of time (block 1415). The level of mobility and period of time are selected to allow for a monitored individual to exhibit resting pulse rate. Where the level of activity and time period is such that resting measurements may be obtained and relied upon (block 1415), the pulse rate of the individual is measured and compared with a pulse rate threshold (block 1420). The pulse rate threshold may be derived either be a generalized pulse rate for an individual of the age and weight of the monitored individual, or may be derived from a pulse rate measured at, for example, the time that a user attached monitored device is attached to the monitored individual. The pulse rate threshold is a range from an upper limit to a lower limit. In some cases, the lower limit is eighty-five (85) percent of the expected or measured pulse rate, and the upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the expected or measured pulse rate.

Where it is determined that the sensed and/or calculated pulse rate of the monitored individual is less than or greater than the pulse rate threshold (block 1420), a likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased as a function of the change in pulse rate (block 1425). Thus, for example, where the sensed and/or calculated pulse rate of the monitored individual is much larger than the pulse rate threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased by a relatively large amount, and where the sensed and/or calculated pulse rate of the monitored individual is only slightly larger than the pulse rate threshold, the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased by a relatively small amount. The large amount may be sufficient when added to a finding that the gait of the monitored individual is outside of an expected range to trigger additional active impairment testing. In contrast, the small amount may be insufficient by itself or in combination with a finding that the gait of the monitored individual is only slightly outside of an expected range to trigger additional active impairment testing. But when the small amount is coupled with a finding that the gait of the monitored individual is only slightly outside of an expected range and another factor would be sufficient to trigger additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual.

Using the particular embodiment discussed above where the gait of the individual less than ten (10) percent outside of the baseline gate threshold results in the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is set to seventy-five (75) percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing, a finding of a pulse rate more than ten (10) percent higher than the upper limit of the pulse rate threshold or less than ninety (90) percent of the lower limit of the pulse rate threshold would result in the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual being increased to one hundred (100) percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing. Alternatively, a finding of a pulse rate less than or equal to ten (10) percent higher than the upper limit of the pulse rate threshold or greater than or equal to ninety (90) percent of the lower limit of the pulse rate threshold would result in the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual being increased by 12.5 percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other functions for defining the likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual.

The location of the monitored individual is received and used to determine if the monitored individual is within the vicinity of an identified location within a defined time window (block 1450). The identified location may be a location known to have, for example, bars where impairing products are sold or consumed. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of locations and/or corresponding locations that may be included as identified locations in accordance with various embodiments. There may be a number of identified locations, and the location of the monitored individual may be compared with a number of identified locations. In some cases, the location of the monitored individual is determined using locating systems included in one or both of a user attached monitor device and/or a user attached monitor device associated with the monitored individual. The time window may be a period sufficient to allow the effects of a chemical substance to render a person impaired. Thus, for example, the time period may be any time between the present time and three hours prior.

Where it is determined that the monitored individual was within a defined range of an identified location within a defined time period (block 1450), the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is increased (block 1455). The increase is insufficient to trigger additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual where proximity to the identified location within the defined time period is the only indicator or impairment that is received. On the other hand, the increase is sufficient to trigger additional active impairment testing of the monitored individual where proximity to the identified location within the defined time period is found in addition to a finding a gait change greater than the baseline gait threshold in block 1405.

Using the particular embodiment discussed above where the gait of the individual less than ten (10) percent outside of the baseline gate threshold results in the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual is set to seventy-five (75) percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing, a finding of the monitored individual within proximity of an identified location results in increasing the likelihood of impairment value for the monitored individual by twenty-five (25) percent of the value that will trigger additional active impairment testing. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other functions for defining the likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual.

The calculated likelihood of impairment is reported for the passive testing (block 1460). As more fully discussed below, this calculated likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual calculated during passive testing is used to determine whether additional active determination of impairment is to be performed.

Turning to FIG. 16, a flow diagram 1500 shows a method for learning an impairment threshold for passive impairment testing based upon feedback from the method of FIG. 17 discussed below (e.g., blocks 1685, 1690). In particular, a likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual that is calculated based upon activities the monitored individual is directed to perform as discussed below in relation to blocks 1685, 1690 of FIG. 17 is provided as the feedback of block 1515. This feedback value is used to update the individual baseline gait threshold that is used to determine likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual during the passive impairment testing discussed above in the method of FIG. 15.

Following flow diagram 1500, an initial baseline gait threshold is provided (block 1505). As discussed above in relation to FIG. 15, this initial baseline gait threshold may be a generalized baseline gait threshold applied to a number of individuals. In other cases, the initial baseline gait threshold may be measured, for example, at the time that a user attached monitor device is attached to the monitored individual. The baseline gait threshold may then be defined with a lower limit of eighty-five (85) percent of the measured value and an upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the measured value. Using the example above where the initial baseline gait threshold is expressed as lateral acceleration per step, the monitored individual could be asked to walk a straight line and the average lateral acceleration per step is measured/calculated. The upper and lower limits are then calculated and stored for later use in determining impairment.

An individual baseline gait threshold is initially set equal to the initial baseline gait threshold (block 1510). This individual baseline gait threshold is the threshold used in block 1405 of FIG. 15, and is updated as discussed in the method of flow diagram 1500 based upon the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual that is calculated based upon activities the monitored individual is directed to perform.

It is determined whether the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual that is calculated based upon activities the monitored individual is directed to perform is available (block 1515). Such feedback becomes available each time additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual is triggered. Where such feedback is not available (block 1515), the current individual baseline gait threshold is provided to a passive impairment testing module (block 1590). As mentioned above, this individual baseline gait threshold is used to determine likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual during the passive impairment monitoring discussed in the method of FIG. 15.

Alternatively, where feedback data is available (block 1515), an active impairment threshold is subtracted from a function of the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual reported as a result of active impairment testing (block 1520). The active impairment threshold may be one or a combination of impairment thresholds used during active impairment testing (see e.g., the threshold(s) used in block 1670 of FIG. 17). The function of the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual reported as a result of active impairment testing may have an output equal to the active impairment threshold when the active impairment threshold is not met (i.e., active impairment testing does not indicate a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired). This results in a value of zero for the subtraction performed in block 1520. Where, on the other hand, the active impairment threshold is met (i.e., active impairment testing indicates a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired), the function of the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual reported has an output proportional to an amount of variance of the likelihood of impairment from the active impairment threshold. Thus, where the active impairment testing indicates a likelihood of impairment (see e.g., block 1670 of FIG. 17), the result of the subtraction performed in block 1520 with a magnitude that is proportional to the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual reported as a result of active impairment testing.

The magnitude of the result of the subtraction is compared with a programmable large threshold value (block 1530). Where magnitude exceeds the programmable large threshold (block 1530), it indicates that the individual baseline gait threshold value that was used in triggering additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual resulted in an accurate discernment of impairment when active impairment testing was applied. In such a case, the individual baseline gait threshold value is modified by an amount proportional to the magnitude of the subtraction of block 1520 (e.g., a large default value as the magnitude exceeded the large threshold of block 1530). In particular, where it was the lower end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1535) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, the large default value is added to the lower value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1540). Alternatively, where it was the upper end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1535) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, the large default value is subtracted from the upper value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1545). This results in an individual baseline gait threshold value that is more sensitive.

Alternatively, it is determined whether the magnitude of the result of the subtraction is less than the large threshold (block 1530), the magnitude of the result of the subtraction is compared with a programmable small threshold value (block 1550). Where magnitude exceeds the programmable small threshold (block 1550), it indicates that the individual baseline gait threshold value that was used in triggering additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual resulted in an accurate discernment of impairment when active impairment testing was applied. In such a case, the individual baseline gait threshold value is modified by an amount proportional to the magnitude of the subtraction of block 1520 (e.g., a small default value as the magnitude exceeded only the small threshold of block 1550). In particular, where it was the lower end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1555) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, a small default value is added to the lower value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1560). Alternatively, where it was the upper end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1555) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, the small default value is subtracted from the upper value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1565). This results in an individual baseline gait threshold value that is more sensitive.

Where, on the other hand, neither the upper threshold (block 1530) nor the lower threshold (block 1550) is exceeded, it indicates that the individual baseline gait threshold value that was used in triggering additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual resulted in an inaccurate discernment of impairment when active impairment testing was applied. In such a case, where it was the lower end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1570) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, a medium default value is subtracted from the lower value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1575). Alternatively, where it was the upper end of the individual baseline gait threshold range (block 1570) that triggered the additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual as discussed above in relation to block 1405 of FIG. 15, the medium default value is added to the upper value of the range of the individual baseline gait threshold value (block 1580). This results in an individual baseline gait threshold value that is less sensitive.

The recently updated individual baseline gait threshold is provided to a passive impairment testing module (block 1590). As mentioned above, this individual baseline gait threshold is used to determine likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual during the passive impairment monitoring discussed in the method of FIG. 15.

Turning to FIG. 17, a flow diagram 1600 shows a method for detecting impairment using a tiered series of passive impairment testing, active impairment testing, and monitoring officer intervention in accordance with some embodiments. Following flow diagram 1600, passive impairment testing is performed on an ongoing basis (block 1605). Such passive impairment testing may include one or more impairment tests that are performed without the active involvement of the monitored individual. For example, the passive impairment tests may include some combination of: a passive balance test where the gait of the monitored individual is monitored using accelerometers included in a user attached monitor device, a change in respiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the individual, a change in perspiration levels outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the individual, a change in pulse rate outside of an increase expected from a detected amount of movement of the individual, red eye detection, a change in activity level of the monitored individual, and/or the location of a monitored individual at or near a location where alcohol or other impairing substances are known to be consumed. In some cases, the passive impairment testing is done in accordance with the methods discussed above in relation to FIGS. 15-16. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of passive impairment tests that may be applied either separately or in combination to discern likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual.

A likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual is modified to reflect results provided from the ongoing passive impairment test (block 1610). This may include, for example, updating a likelihood that a monitored individual is impaired to be equal to the calculated likelihood of impairment value received from a passive impairment testing module. This passive impairment testing module may operate, for example, similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 15.

It is determined whether the modified likelihood of impairment satisfies a passive impairment threshold (i.e., whether the modified likelihood of impairment reasonably indicates a monitored individual is impaired)(block 1615). In some cases, the passive impairment threshold may be an individual baseline threshold that is dynamically adjusted based upon prior findings similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 16. Alternatively, in other cases the passive impairment threshold is a user programmable threshold that does not change unless re-programmed by a user.

Where the modified likelihood of impairment indicates a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired (block 1615), the monitored individual is notified to begin active impairment testing (block 1620). Any process may be used to request that the monitored individual engage in active impairment testing including, but not limited to, sending a text message or a voice message to the monitored individual via a user attached monitor device. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to notify the monitored individual to begin an active impairment test.

The notice provided to the monitored individual to begin active impairment testing includes an indication to accept the active testing. It is determined whether the monitored individual accepted the test start (block 1625) within sufficient time (i.e., some predetermined time limit to accept, such as, for example, one hour or less) (block 1630). Where the monitored individual fails to accept the test start within the defined time (blocks 1625, 1630), a likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual is increased to at least one hundred (100) percent of the value required to trigger a request for intervention by a monitoring officer (block 1635).

Alternatively, where the monitored individual accepts the test start within the defined time (blocks 1625, 1630), active impairment testing is performed (block 1650). Such active impairment testing may include, but is not limited to, monitoring stability of monitored individual as the monitored individual is walking or otherwise moving as directed in the test, monitoring individual's reaction time as directed in a test, and/or monitoring individual's eye movement as the individual watches a defined video program. Other active impairment tests may be used either separately or in combination with one or more of the aforementioned tests and include, but are not limited to, changes in pulse rate, changes in body temperature, changes in breathing, and/or perspiration. In some cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 3. In various cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 8a-8d . In one or more cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 8a and 9a-9c . In some cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 20a-10b . In one or more cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIGS. 11a-11b . In various cases, the active impairment testing may be performed similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 12. In various cases, the active impairment testing may be augmented to include historical based data similar to that discussed above in relation to FIG. 13. Based on the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of active impairment tests that may be applied either separately or in combination.

The likelihood of impairment for the monitored individual is modified to reflect results provided from the active impairment testing (block 1665). This may include, for example, updating a likelihood that a monitored individual is impaired to be equal to the calculated likelihood of impairment value received from an active impairment testing module. This active impairment testing module may operate, for example, similar to that discussed above in relation to one or more of FIG. 3, FIGS. 8a-8d , FIGS. 9a-9c , FIGS. 20a-10b , FIGS. 11a-11b , FIG. 12, and/or FIG. 13.

It is determined whether the modified likelihood of impairment satisfies an active impairment threshold (i.e., whether the modified likelihood of impairment reasonably indicates a monitored individual is impaired)(block 1670). In some cases, the active impairment threshold may be an individual baseline threshold that is actively adjusted based upon prior findings similar to that discussed below in relation to FIG. 18. Alternatively, in other cases the active impairment threshold is a user programmable threshold that does not change unless re-programmed by a user.

Where the modified likelihood of impairment indicates a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired (block 1670), the likelihood of impairment is reported to a monitoring officer assigned to the monitored individual (block 1675). This reporting may be done, for example, by sending a text message or a voice message to the monitoring officer. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of methods that may be used to report the finding of a likelihood of impairment to the monitoring officer.

The monitoring officer then follows up with a monitoring officer intervention (block 1680). Such monitoring officer intervention may include, but is not limited to, a video chat between the monitoring officer and the monitored individual via a user attached monitor device associated with the monitored individual, an in person interview where the monitoring officer is dispatched to the location of the monitored individual, the monitored individual being directed to a substance testing laboratory where a blood, urine, or other test is applied to determine chemical impairment. The monitoring officer indicates that either the individual was impaired or not impaired.

The results from the active impairment testing are provided to an active impairment baseline learning module and a passive impairment baseline learning module (blocks 1685, 1690). The passive impairment baseline learning module uses the reported results from the active impairment testing to update the passive impairment baseline or threshold used in block 1615. In some cases, the passive impairment threshold learning module operates similar to that described above in relation to FIG. 16. The results from the officer follow up are provided to an active impairment baseline learning module (block 1690). The active impairment baseline learning modules the reported results from the officer follow to update the active impairment threshold used in block 1670. In some cases, the active impairment threshold learning module operates similar to that described below in relation to FIG. 18.

Turning to FIG. 18, a flow diagram 1700 shows a method for learning an impairment threshold for active impairment testing based upon feedback from the method of FIG. 17 discussed above (e.g., block 1690). In particular, an indication of whether the monitoring officer found impairment in block 1680 of FIG. 17 is provided as feedback. This feedback value is used to update the individual active impairment threshold that is used to determine likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual during the active impairment testing discussed in the method of FIG. 16 (or any of FIG. 3, FIGS. 8a-8d , FIGS. 9a-9c , FIGS. 20a-10b , FIGS. 11a-11b , FIG. 12, and/or FIG. 13).

Following flow diagram 1700, an initial active impairment threshold is provided (block 1705). This initial active impairment threshold may be a generalized active impairment threshold applied to a number of individuals. In other cases, the initial active impairment threshold may be measured, for example, at the time that a user attached monitor device is attached to the monitored individual. The active impairment threshold may then be defined with a lower limit of eighty-five (85) percent of the measured value and an upper limit of one hundred, ten (110) percent of the measured value. Using the example where the threshold is for an amount of eye movement, the monitored individual may be asked to watch a video during which their eye movement is monitored and quantified. The upper and lower limits of the active impairment threshold are then calculated and stored from the quantified eye movement for later use in determining impairment.

An individual active impairment threshold is initially set equal to the initial active impairment threshold (block 1710). This individual active impairment threshold is the threshold used in block 1670 of FIG. 17, and is updated as discussed in the method of flow diagram 1700 based upon the likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual that is calculated based upon activities the monitored individual is directed to perform.

It is determined whether a monitoring officer indicated that the monitored individual was impaired in a prior testing process (block 1715). Such feedback becomes available each time additional active determination of impairment of the monitored individual indicates a likelihood of impairment and an intervening monitoring officer follows up with a finding that the monitored individual is impaired.

Where the monitoring officer finds impairment (block 1715) and it was the lower end of the individual active impairment threshold range (block 1735) that triggered the officer intervention as discussed above in relation to blocks 1670-1680 of FIG. 17, a first programmable value is added to the lower value of the range of the individual active impairment threshold (block 1740). Alternatively, where the monitoring officer finds impairment (block 1715) and it was the upper end of the individual active impairment threshold range (block 1735) that triggered the officer intervention as discussed above in relation to blocks 1670-1680 of FIG. 17, a second programmable value is subtracted from upper value of the range of the individual active impairment threshold (block 1745). This results in an individual active impairment threshold value that is more sensitive.

Alternatively, where the monitoring officer does not find impairment (block 1715) and it was the lower end of the individual active impairment threshold range (block 1770) that triggered the officer intervention as discussed above in relation to blocks 1670-1680 of FIG. 17, a third programmable value is subtracted from the lower value of the range of the individual active impairment threshold (block 1775). Alternatively, where the monitoring officer does not find impairment (block 1715) and it was the upper end of the individual active impairment threshold range (block 1770) that triggered the officer intervention as discussed above in relation to blocks 1670-1680 of FIG. 17, a fourth programmable value is added to the upper value of the range of the individual active impairment threshold (block 1780). This results in an individual active impairment threshold value that is less sensitive.

The recently updated individual active impairment threshold is provided to an active impairment testing module (block 1790). As mentioned above, this individual active impairment threshold is used to determine likelihood of impairment of the monitored individual during the active impairment monitoring discussed in the method of FIG. 17.

Turning to FIG. 19, a flow diagram 1900 shows a method in accordance with some embodiments for selectively triggering a testing process based upon one or more conditions. Thus, for example, the process of starting a monitored individual response test as discussed above in relation to FIGS. 2a-2b may be automatically triggered based upon one or more pre-determined conditions including, but not limited to, a predetermined testing schedule, the monitored individual moving into an area where travel is precluded (i.e. an exclusion zone), or the monitored individual moving near a location where testing would be required (e.g., within range of a fixed location based station deployed at the individual's residence or treatment provider). Similarly, the tests discussed in, inter alia, FIGS. 8a-8d, 9a-9c, 20a-10b, and/or 11a-11b may be automatically triggered.

Following flow diagram 1900, it is determined whether a time for a scheduled test has arrived (block 1905). This may be determined, for example, by comparing a real time clock with a number of pre-determined event times. Where a time has arrived (block 1905), the corresponding test is triggered (block 1920). Alternatively, where the location of the monitored individual is out of a defined area (i.e., the monitored individual has moved into an exclusion zone) (block 1910), a pre-selected test is triggered (block 1920). Alternatively, where the location of a monitored individual is within range of, for example, a fixed location base station a within range condition is met (block 1915), a pre-selected test is triggered (block 1920). Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of conditions that may automatically trigger testing in accordance with one or more embodiments.

In conclusion, the present invention provides for novel systems, devices, and methods for identifying impairment using measurement devices. While detailed descriptions of one or more embodiments of the invention have been given above, various alternatives, modifications, and equivalents will be apparent to those skilled in the art without varying from the spirit of the invention. Therefore, the above description should not be taken as limiting the scope of the invention, which is defined by the appended claims. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A system for determining a likelihood of impairment, the system comprising: a user attached monitor device, wherein the user attached monitor device includes: a strap operable to secure the user attached monitor device to a wrist of a monitored individual; a sensor; a display; a processor; and a computer readable medium including non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: generate a characteristic of the monitored individual based at least in part on data received from the sensor; and generate an impairment value based at least in part on the characteristic of the monitored individual.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer readable medium further includes non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: receive a test setup request via wireless communication network, wherein the test setup request indicates a particular impairment test; and start the particular impairment test by enabling the sensor and requesting that the monitored individual perform a particular activity.
 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual is an eye movement characteristic, wherein the sensor is an image sensor, and wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: display a video on a display of the user attached monitor device; receive images of eyes of the monitored individual captured by the image sensor while the monitored individual watches the video; and use the received images to calculate the eye movement characteristic.
 4. The system of claim 3, wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the eye movement characteristic to a baseline eye movement threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the eye movement characteristic and the baseline eye movement threshold.
 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual is a balance characteristic, wherein the sensor is an accelerometer, and wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: receive acceleration data from the accelerometer; and calculate the balance characteristic based upon the acceleration data.
 6. The system of claim 5, wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the balance characteristic to a baseline balance threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the balance characteristic and the baseline balance threshold.
 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual is a duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual, wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the characteristic of a monitored individual include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: display a game via a display on the user attached monitor device; and receive timer data from the timer, wherein the timer data indicates the duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual while playing the game.
 8. The system of claim 7, wherein the non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to generate the impairment value include non-transitory instructions executable by the processor to: compare the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual to a baseline reaction threshold; and generate the impairment value based upon the comparison of the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual and the baseline reaction threshold.
 9. The system of claim 1, wherein the computer readable medium is a first computer readable medium, wherein the processor is a first processor, the system further comprising: a central monitoring station including a second computer readable medium and a second processor, the second computer readable medium including instructions executable by a second processor to: transmit an impairment test request to the user attached monitor device via a wireless communication network; and receive results from the user attached monitor device in response to the impairment test request.
 10. The system of claim 1, wherein the impairment value indicates a likelihood that the monitored individual is impaired.
 11. A method for monitoring impairment, the method comprising: providing a user attached monitor, wherein the user attached monitor device includes: a strap operable to secure the user attached monitor device to a wrist of a monitored individual; a sensor; and a display; alerting the monitored individual to engage in an impairment test; sensing a characteristic of the monitored individual using the sensor; and generating an impairment value based at least in part on the characteristic of the monitored individual.
 12. The method of claim 12, the method further comprising: displaying the impairment value via the display.
 13. The method of claim 11, the method further comprising: transmitting the impairment value to a central monitoring station via a wireless communication network.
 14. The method of claim 11, the method further comprising: receiving a test setup request via wireless communication network, wherein the test setup request indicates a particular impairment test; and start the particular impairment test by enabling the sensor and requesting that the monitored individual perform a particular activity.
 15. The method of claim 11, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual is an eye movement characteristic, wherein the sensor is an image sensor, and wherein the method further comprises: displaying a video on a display of the user attached monitor device; receiving images of eyes of the monitored individual captured by the image sensor while the monitored individual watches the video; and using the received images to calculate the eye movement characteristic.
 16. The method of claim 14, the method further comprising: comparing the eye movement characteristic to a baseline eye movement threshold; and generating the impairment value based upon the comparison of the eye movement characteristic and the baseline eye movement threshold.
 17. The method of claim 11, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual is a balance characteristic, wherein the sensor is an accelerometer, the method further comprising: receiving acceleration data from the accelerometer; and calculating the balance characteristic based upon the acceleration data.
 18. The method of claim 16, the method further comprising: comparing the balance characteristic to a baseline balance threshold; and generating the impairment value based upon the comparison of the balance characteristic and the baseline balance threshold.
 19. The method of claim 11, wherein the characteristic of the monitored individual includes a duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual, the method further comprising: displaying a game via a display on the user attached monitor device; and receiving timer data from the timer, wherein the timer data indicates the duration of time for an action taken by the monitored individual while playing the game.
 20. The method of claim 18, the method further comprising: comparing the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual to a baseline reaction threshold; and generating the impairment value based upon the comparison of the duration of time for the action taken by the monitored individual and the baseline reaction threshold.
 21. A system for determining impairment, the system comprising: a central monitoring device including a first processor and a first memory, wherein the first memory including non-transitory instructions executable by the first processor to: receive an impairment value; a user attached monitor device including: a strap configured to secure the user attached monitor device to a limb of a monitored individual; a sensor; a display; a second processor; and a second computer readable medium including non-transitory instructions executable by the second processor to: generate a characteristic of the monitored individual based at least in part on data received from the sensor; generate the impairment value based at least in part on the characteristic of the monitored individual; and transmit the impairment value to the central monitoring device via a wireless communication network. 